From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Calloway v. Rudenstein

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
May 31, 2017
169 A.3d 558 (Pa. 2017)

Opinion

No. 49 EM 2017

05-31-2017

Edmond CALLOWAY, Petitioner v. David RUDENSTEIN, Respondent


ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 31st day of May, 2017, the Application for Leave to File Original Process and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus and/or Extraordinary Relief are DISMISSED. See Commonwealth v. Ali, 10 A.3d 282, 293 (Pa. 2010) (explaining that hybrid representation is not permissible). The Prothonotary is DIRECTED to forward the filings to counsel of record.


Summaries of

Calloway v. Rudenstein

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
May 31, 2017
169 A.3d 558 (Pa. 2017)
Case details for

Calloway v. Rudenstein

Case Details

Full title:Edmond CALLOWAY, Petitioner v. David RUDENSTEIN, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Date published: May 31, 2017

Citations

169 A.3d 558 (Pa. 2017)